In respect of Character there are
four things to be aimed at. First, and most important,
it must be good. Now any speech or action that
manifests moral purpose of any kind will be expressive
of character: the character will be good if the
purpose is good. This rule is relative to each
class. Even a woman may be good, and also a slave;
though the woman may be said to be an inferior being,
and the slave quite worthless. The second thing
to aim at is propriety. There is a type of manly
valour; but valour in a woman, or unscrupulous cleverness,
is inappropriate. Thirdly, character must be
true to life: for this is a distinct thing from
goodness and propriety, as here described. The
fourth point is consistency: for though the subject
of the imitation, who suggested the type, be inconsistent,
still he must be consistently inconsistent. As
an example of motiveless degradation of character,
we have Menelaus in the Orestes: of character
indecorous and inappropriate, the lament of Odysseus
in the Scylla, and the speech of Melanippe: of
inconsistency, the Iphigenia at Aulis,—for
Iphigenia the suppliant in no way resembles her later
self.
As in the structure of the plot, so
too in the portraiture of character, the poet should
always aim either at the necessary or the probable.
Thus a person of a given character should speak or
act in a given way, by the rule either of necessity
or of probability; just as this event should follow
that by necessary or probable sequence. It is
therefore evident that the unravelling of the plot,
no less than the complication, must arise out of the
plot itself, it must not be brought about by the ’Deus
ex Machina’—as in the Medea, or in
the Return of the Greeks in the Iliad. The ‘Deus
ex Machina’ should be employed only for events
external to the drama,—for antecedent or
subsequent events, which lie beyond the range of human
knowledge, and which require to be reported or foretold;
for to the gods we ascribe the power of seeing all
things. Within the action there must be nothing
irrational. If the irrational cannot be excluded,
it should be outside the scope of the tragedy.
Such is the irrational element in the Oedipus of Sophocles.
Again, since Tragedy is an imitation
of persons who are above the common level, the example
of good portrait-painters should be followed.
They, while reproducing the distinctive form of the
original, make a likeness which is true to life and
yet more beautiful. So too the poet, in representing
men who are irascible or indolent, or have other defects
of character, should preserve the type and yet ennoble
it. In this way Achilles is portrayed by Agathon
and Homer.
These then are rules the poet should
observe. Nor should he neglect those appeals
to the senses, which, though not among the essentials,
are the concomitants of poetry; for here too there
is much room for error. But of this enough has
been said in our published treatises.